Defend Our Schools – Hockey Puck Fantasy Versus Bleeding Reality

Oakland faculty passed a proposal to issue hockey pucks for school security.

U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- The topic of school security came up at a faculty meeting at Oakland University in Michigan. Someone said they should fight back against an attacker on campus. That sounded like a good idea. One Pennsylvania school gave each classroom a bucket of rocks with which to fight off an intruder. The Oakland faculty passed a proposal to issue hockey pucks for school security. The local police chief might have planted the idea. A common classroom demonstration uses tennis balls against an attacker who is armed with an airsoft gun.

I’ll give the professors an A+ grade for creativity. Unfortunately, anyone with practical experience would have serious doubts about the real-world effectiveness of hockey pucks against an attacker armed with a firearm. Too often, academicians love their fantasy model of the world more than facts. I doubt the school administration will ever test the effectiveness of their hockey puck “security”.

No one who studies institutional security would propose handing out hockey pucks to defend a politician, a celebrity, or a business executive. Someone with an ounce of integrity would at least ask to test this hockey puck proposal by taking video of a simulated attack using airsoft guns and tennis balls. Failure is only a matter of life and death.

I am a shooter. I also study school security, so I will predict the results of that simulated test. An amateur sportsman could repeatedly shoot anyone who isn’t hiding in the “hard corners” of the classroom. The “hard corners” are the corners that can’t be seen until you’ve entered through the doorway. I teach my self-defense students that a gun is a distance tool. In this case, the attacker never has to enter the classroom to kill unopposed.

I give the professors a failing grade, an F, for actual performance. That isn’t the answer they wanted and it isn’t fun to tell someone they failed. This issue is too serious for false evaluations, for a social “pass”.

Real solutions are hard. We spend between a quarter to a third of the cost of school or municipal buildings on meeting fire and other safety code requirements. Those requirements are effective. It has been almost six decades since a student was killed in a school building fire. In contrast, the attack at Columbine High School was 19 years ago. We’ve yet to incorporate physical security requirements into our building codes for schools, churches and municipal buildings.

The hockey puck proposal has done all it needed to do despite its failure in the real world. The people who proposed and implemented the hockey puck defense never said it would save lives. The proposal was intended to end the debate over campus safety. The hockey puck defense distracts us from facing the deadly serious issues of security on a university campus. Unarmed Security is security theater.

Unarmed security is, frankly, a contradiction in terms, but hockey pucks did what they were supposed to do.

Unarmed security is, frankly, a contradiction in terms, but hockey pucks did what they were supposed to do. The security-theater kept the voters amused and distracted.. so far. Who will be held liable for the lives this charade might cost? Given that it is a state school, the state’s attorney will say the security failure was unimaginable and that that the state is immune from prosecution or lawsuit.

This is negligence. Stop playing political games with our children’s lives.

gwp1948 is correct in this statement: “Those who come up with ideas like this are well intentioned fools. They would run away if people started launching hockey pucks or river rocks or canned goods at them so they think a crazed killer would do the same.”

This is actually the underlying fault with much of the thinking on the left. They are convinced that they are of superior minds so their way of thinking is logically what anyone else would think as well. They fail to take into account that there are, in fact, differing mindsets and that someone capable of committing a mass shooting is most certainly not going to follow the same “logic path” that they would. THIS is why their “logic” is anything but!!!!!!

Remember folks, if you ask someone for an opinion on something then almost invariably a liberal will begin with “I FEEL that…..”, and a conservative will begin with “I THINK that……..

Holy crap is this a dumb idea! What percentage of liberal teachers can even throw a puck?? Sounds like your trying to get the gunman’s attention so he or she can shoot your! You would be better off using the stick and checking the sh!t out of them! What is wrong with people? At least send the teachers to a personal self defense class! Maybe they can grow a pr, vote republican, and stand for the 2nd Amendment!! Then we can all stand together for our flag and great country!!

The first point is to counterattack with whatever is available. Throw books or chairs or desks, etc. to distract the shooter and make him vunerable. The commenters here apparently have forgotten that the Tucson shooter was taken down when he had a problem reloading.

Obviously, we should all grasp this first point- fight back with whatever you have handy. However, we should also grasp the obvious second point – have a gun handy. While some of us may be brave enough to face a gun with no, or less effective, weapons, we will likely die in the process, and will generally remain unsuccessful at stopping the assailant. The ONLY reason anyone will find him/herself in this position is the misguided legal restraints we place on our schools and their staff. Providing something ineffective, like hockey pucks, or unicorn dust, serves no purpose but to avoid having to admit you are unwilling to address the problem, but are equally unwilling to admit it. This whole thing is just another example of “virtue signalling,” and the cowards who engage in it deserve to be called out and shamed for it.

Rocks, hockey pucks, books (laptops), or whatever use them if you got them. Everyone needs to know that when they or their group are attacked that they are made the first responders. A firearm is my choose for self defense, mentality is the first defense. The anti-gun groups that include to many academics desire no mentalities that allow for defense. We must control these people who want to control us.

My big question is WHERE IS THE SELF PRESURVATION MODE??????? I understand the hide mode but if I’m in a spot and no escape is possible, I am not just going to let some ass-hole just shoot me, I’m going to give it my best shot to try to survive! This is a very good article as to putting out about fires in schools but no action by any Politicians other than No Gun Zones since 1999 Columbine, But they are good on Lip Service about what they are doing to stop the school shootings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They got all upset when a politician got shot at a Baseball game, and added all kinds of security for themselves but when it comes to our schools it’s screw you and the kids!!!!!!!!!! They don’t care at all their kids are in private schools and have all kinds of security that will stop anything from happening there!!!!!!!! The best is if you get a chance to ask the Politician WHAT IS THE PRICE OF A CHILDS LIFE? You won’t get an answer or you will get a mouth full of excuses as to why not!!!!!!!!!

I have it figured out. The DNC is using the blood of our children to garnish support with each school/mass shooting. The NRA has a solution NRA School Shield – it’s been around for years: I was onboard from the get go. There is no reason the leadership should not get behind NRA’s School Shield program. When our children are murdered in school, as parents we need to sue ANY and ALL leadership for preventing measures to put armed staff in our schools to protect our children. We live in a era with zero moral integrity and we need to use law to fight this, just as the anti-gun scum use law to violate our Second Amendment.

What is even a sadder situation is that all of us that think we know so much more than these, “teachers” and, “professors of higher education”, those of us that proclaim to be of a higher Intelligence are focusing on the inanimate objects of these crisis, yet doing absolutely NOTHING about the key solution!

That would be removing these left-wing dumbasses from our institutions of, “EDUCATION” and Department Thereof, replacing them with INTELLIGENT and COMPETANT teachers and professors. Why do you think we hav not focused on and enacted on this seemingly only viable SOLUTION?

Academia is saturated with unrealistic thinkers. That propagate only their thoughts, recruit and promote only their own kind. Your solution, would be very difficult, but should be tried. I had only one Professor that would say if your head is in the clouds, keep you feet on the ground. He was one of the rare birds now extinct in the nation of Academia.

The new Canadian Force Magnum hockey puck is awesome for self defense. With its higher velocity high energy man stopping power this is a self-defense puck to be feared–word is the Canuks will even arm their SWAT teams with it under orders of their left wing leader.

Do they know students will have to stand up exposing themselves fully to the shooter. They’re also going to have to be a bit closer than the shooter would have to be for their defensive tool to be effective. Did they even give this plan 5 seconds of serious thought? I think not. What a shame.

The dimwits see an ALICE video, or do training with tennis balls, and they apparently miss the key point that while students launch whatever is at hand ‘somebody’ has to attack the shooter. Swarming, taught by ALICE, is mass suicide unless the shooter runs out of ammo. If everybody throws hockey pucks who is going to attack? If nobody attacks the shooter gets minor injuries and then kills everyone who threw a hockey puck. Those who come up with ideas like this are well intentioned fools. They would run away if people started launching hockey pucks or river rocks or canned goods at them so they think a crazed killer would do the same. Nope! The crazed killer would keep shooting until a good guy/gal with a gun shows up and shoots back.